Broadly speaking, a next-generation RTS that wants to compete with Ashes will have to develop an engine to do it. The Nitrous engine.

PC World investigated this claim earlier this year. You can see their results here. The short version is that having a core neutral GPU engine is very hard to develop and Nitrous is the first and so far only one we know of that has shipped a game that does it (though Frostbite might be there).

So we have the engine.

Step 2: You need the gameplay

The original release of Ashes was an impressive, albeit limited RTS. With a fraction of the budget of Planetary Annihilation and around 1/17th the budget of Supreme Commander, it’s a tough haul to compete. But our plan is long-term. The ugly fact is, the RTS market is small and you can’t spend a huge amount on an RTS up front if it’s new IP.

Escalation was a big step in the right direction for serious RTS players and lets us move the base game into being an introduction to the genre. But we still need a lot of core RTS features:

Replays

A Solid Modding Suite

Lots of UI customization

Lots of power user interactive features

None of that will come quickly. Replays is just about done. Steamworks sharing is almost done. But we’ll talk about the modding in the next section.

Step 3: You need the content

And this is the biggest challenge for us. Content is expensive and we live in an age where someone can just buy Supreme Commander: Forged Alliance for $5 on a Steam sale which has years of added content.

From here to there

First, we have to decide what the ultimate Ashes RTS needs to have. No one will agree on this so I’ll just give you what I think it will have and as always, my opinion is subject to change based on persuasive arguments from players and this is all just my opinion obviously:

(click to enlarge)

First, yes, it’s totally inappropriate for me to even engage in a public comparison like this.

Second, yes, it’s even dumber to argue that competing games are objectively better than your own game.

Third, many of the weaknesses of a given game are either design choices or budget choices. The relative budgets of each game translate into more green wins.

But I’m still going to do it since I’ve worked closely with the developers of the other games over the years (Stardock was GPG’s publisher, Blizzard’s contracted expansion pack maker for StarCraft: Retribution, and we’re friends with the UberE team).

Let’s break these down into the areas that are on our radar:

Differentiated T3s

As part of a future tech tree update, we will want to let players do a lot of interesting things with the different T3s. We may eventually change the way T3s upgrade where you don’t pick their upgrade when they level up but rather they get a general bonus with their specific coolness chosen at the macro level as techs.

We also have two new T3s per race in development. I’d like to see these out in the Spring time.

The new T3s will be available as a free DLC to existing players.

Differentiated T4s

Ashes currently has no T4s. This will come in the form of Juggernauts with 3 per race. They’re a very late game unit.

Differentiated T5s

We have none of these in development but think “doomsday weapons”

Multiple Paths to victory

Right now we have two. But we would also like to have a turtle based victory path as well where they can build something that slowly spreads across the land.

Easy way to manage mods in game (we have to mess with the directories on the disk ourselves)

Some sort of particle editor (we do this by hand and C++ right now)

A tool that converts FBX files into OXModels (we have a special build of the game that converts them for us)

A UI editor (we currently modify this by hand)

Support for Substance Painter (we currently modify our materials by hand)

A way for designers to modify terrain easily (we currently have to edit files by hand)

All of this is doable. It will just take time and money. So we have to carefully pick what we do first.

Great single player replayability

Ours is good but not exception. Here is what I think we need to do:

Current Ascendancy wars

Future Ascendancy Wars

I think the current Ascendancy Wars button should get renamed to Campaign and Ascendancy Wars call up a map of the galaxy (or at least the Orion sector) with thousands of worlds on it with you versus several AI factions.

Different worlds would give you wealth and you could use that wealth to buy more Quantum Bandwidth that would let you basically set up defenses on worlds so that they are harder to take. Some worlds would unlock skins and other special goodies that would get added to your account.

Great Multiplayer community

Our community is great (the people). There just aren’t enough of them.

One thing we’re going to do in the next couple weeks is release an external tool that will make it easy to see when the queue is busy and let you chat with people from outside the game.

External Singularity Community app

That’s the near-term boost we can do.

The longer-term version will require some more thought.

Replays

These are just about done. We have them internally now though.

Good Economic / Strategic Depth

I think this will require 1 or 2 more resources along with corresponding units along with a tech tree.

Good base building

See above

Interesting technology choices

see above

Long-term replayability overall

That will require a third and 4th race along with additional locomotion units (crawling units, tracked units, etc.).

BTW, gravity channeling units cannot go on water any more than a Star Wars landspeeder could go on water. It would sink.

How you can help

The speed in which we can do all of the above is largely based on how many engineers and artists I can assign to it.

Broadly speaking, I’d love to see us hire 2 full time engineers and then assign 2 of our existing full-time artists just to implement the above.

That’s a $40k per month burn rate. The sales will support this. However, where we need help is in evangelism. Making sure people know about this game and how it’s evolving.

Participating on the forums and telling us what you want to see will help us prioritize.

Just your presence in the community helps. We’re in this for the long-haul (at least until 2022 anyway, then we’ll see where things stand).

In Total Annihilation there’s a map called Caldera’s rim. It’s a huge naval map with bits of islands in it. That’s where I want us to eventually get in terms of battlefield flexibility.

That would be great, but, would it be possible to have something like that, but with other terrain types? Such as, multiple islands with tons of water around, a large volcano in the process of spewing lava (never gets to water). Basically, mix up all the terrain we already have, such as lava, crystal, ground, mountains, water, etc.

As part of a future tech tree update, we will want to let players do a lot of interesting things with the different T3s. We may eventually change the way T3s upgrade where you don’t pick their upgrade when they level up but rather they get a general bonus with their specific coolness chosen at the macro level as techs.

Honestly, I like the current level system for them, but I would make it go past Lvl 5. Adding more things for them to do would be wonderful, though. Maybe have a way to equip them? Such as, a fourth dread which you can customize before you begin the match? Such as, you can choose which weapons it would have from the current dreads. Seems overly complicated but I'd dig that. As for the removing the current system altogether, I'd shy from that. But it really would depend on what that cool macro is.

Right now we have two. But we would also like to have a turtle based victory path as well where they can build something that slowly spreads across the land.

It would depend on what that spreading thing is and what it does. It could be a race specific thing. Speaking of which, how cool would that be? Each race having its own third way to win. Examples;

PHC: Build a 'node' which connects to other PHC worlds and allowing all their quanta from all worlds with a gate to link, hence, instant win. Super expensive, super long build time, and it is marked on the mini map after the enemy finds it. The enemy becomes aware of its construction when it's a quarter done.

Sub: Turns all metal/radioactive/quanta that they gain towards the production of a new sub AI. When completed the AI 'hacks' the enemy nexus and takes it over to use as it's own.

Nemesis: Controlling a node for an X amount of time makes the node release spores(or something like your idea). When they reach critical mass they attack the enemy nexus.

The Rebel Humans: They can build a planetary quanta jammer which cuts off the enemy access to the planet.

A lot of these are more or less the same thing but with different names and explanations. Would give the game more variety and incentive to get it over its competition since who want's the same lame wins when you have a different win per faction. Plus, more replayability and everything.

I think the current Ascendancy Wars button should get renamed to Campaign and Ascendancy Wars call up a map of the galaxy (or at least the Orion sector) with thousands of worlds on it with you versus several AI factions.

Different worlds would give you wealth and you could use that wealth to buy more Quantum Bandwidth that would let you basically set up defenses on worlds so that they are harder to take. Some worlds would unlock skins and other special goodies that would get added to your account.

Campaign is too generic, I would keep Ascendancy Wars for it. It sounds cool, and every war has it'sown name (I.E. War of the Golden Stool, Holy Man's Rebellion, October Incident. (all real wars)). So, assuming you keep Ascendancy Wars for the main story arch, the secondary mode could use a different name, or could just be Conquest.

As for the gameplay itself;

Each world gives you wealth quanta, which you can use to buy different perks. Say, you get 10k quanta this way, and you get to start with a decent base built (2 or 3 factories, defenses, quanta generators). You can use it start with defenses alone, or maybe with a small army from the get-go. The Ai gets to use their own abilities in the same way.

Skins are a great idea! I love it. Like, different colors for your forces, or just for different units? Maybe for buildings? Or particle effects? All of the above?

Sponsor some YouTubers and Streamers, give them a free copy of the game every now and then to use as a prize to viewers, like, have the viewers leave a comment and the best comment gets the free copy. It could really boost the game by getting it more publicity at the expense of maybe 5 copies of the game a month. Though you should do research to see who the popular people are and who you want to do this with.

I think this will require 1 or 2 more resources along with corresponding units along with a tech tree.

Current resources;

Metal

Radio actives

Quanta

New resources would have to fill in some gap and be useful somehow.

Research (needs a better name)

As for the tech tree, I thought of an idea. How about something that adds diversity to the game? Well, that's the idea as it is I guess. My idea is as follows; Let the player choose how they grow with more impactful decisions, while at the same time giving players a unique experience every game. The Research resource can be used to unlock techs. Say, 100 research can be used to either unlock air units or T2 units. Another 100 can be used to unlock another thing. Example; 100 research->air, 100 research-> bombers, 100 research -> T2. Or, 100 research T2-> 100 research -> more advanced T2 (like artillery or sniper), 250 research -> T3.

With that system, each game would depend on player choices and would increase diversity in each match massively. But it is a big change and idk if you'll want to do it.

That will require a third and 4th race along with additional locomotion units (crawling units, tracked units, etc.).

BTW, gravity channeling units cannot go on water any more than a Star Wars landspeeder could go on water. It would sink.

Yay, 4 races and diversity. As for the hovering units sinking.... Why? What's the reason it sinking other than for just gameplay purposes? I mean, if they can use gravity to keep themselves above land can't they use gravity over water? It's not like gravity vanishes when you're above water. Wouldn't it be better to allow them to go over water, but they get a large slow debuff, and water units have longer (than average) range and dmg?

Wow, so much exciting stuff going on! Really cant wait to play with al these things! I really hope those Juggernauts will be add to the game during the end of winter as you mention it before in the steam forums. We really need those units in game to add some extra diversity to the game.

I hope you can answer some questions

1. Will those Juggernauts have more diversity in weapons then the current T3?

First, yes, it’s totally inappropriate for me to even engage in a public comparison like this.

Second, yes, it’s even dumber to argue that competing games are objectively better than your own game.

Eh, unorthodox maybe but I'm sure more than a few of your regular customers like to see this kind of honesty. Half the reason I keep coming back to your products is that your team sticks with them long enough for there to be a visible learning experience and beyond Demigod (which wasn't really your fault as I recall), takes action to keep improvements coming. For me, it's heartening to know you guys are keeping an eye on what other games do well. Even if you can't incorporate everything, knowing what 'works' can only help you in the long run.

Again, despite my regular and specific criticisms, for what it's worth, I do appreciate that your team's vision still involves growing and improving the product. Buying Escalation was an easy choice for me and I'd be happy to throw more cash at some of the content that I'm seeing here.

While I was not a massive fan of ashes originally, seeing all the plans that you guys have in place and the general direction of escalation is making me really excited for the future of this game. Also excited for upcoming mod support features/tools

In response to the person higher up who said about sponsoring streamers i suggest possibly sponsoring one of the FAF community casters like Gyle or Speed2 as thats the audience that is most likely to add to the community if they find out about the game

As part of a future tech tree update, we will want to let players do a lot of interesting things with the different T3s. We may eventually change the way T3s upgrade where you don’t pick their upgrade when they level up but rather they get a general bonus with their specific coolness chosen at the macro level as techs.

The current system is awesome, it allows you to focus your Dreadnaught exactly how you want. If you really want to change it, increase the max levels perhaps to allow for a "flawless" Dreadnaught at max level (Every skill and bonus taken).

I wouldn't mind seeing some tweaks to the T3 improvement system but it's hard to compare what's there to a new proposal without knowing what he meant by "interesting things." As it stands, a lot of the current skill upgrades feel like they've been arbitrarily assigned to one exclusive tree or the other since many of them don't seem related to one another (the Cronus radar upgrade requiring a close-range area attack, for example). Plus, from what I've seen of competitive play, with a free instant-heal in the mix and the relatively low army counts in most games, it seems like many of the existing skills aren't getting much use to begin with.

If things stay as they are now, as a QOL feature, I do think it'd be nice if there were some way to see the entire skill lineup rather than just the two (plus the heal) that are available at level-up. As a new player especially, it's harder to make an informed choice with your Dreads when it's not clear where each 'tree' is going.

None of the points you list address gameplay, if you are talking solely from playing the game. You have good gameplay, though what irks me is the lack of storyline. Though to say adding a storyline will fix x amount of problems means nothing. I've been playing Grey Goo recently. I am impressed with the storyline. Yet it's another under the radar game. It seems RTS just isn't as popular as it was, probably due to the whole FPS boom which provide a more instant gratification with little negative set backs which can be quickly remedied.

And this is the biggest challenge for us. Content is expensive and we live in an age where someone can just buy Supreme Commander: Forged Alliance for $5 on a Steam sale which has years of added content.

Any developer starting a new IP with face this challenge. Perhaps why COD and Battlefield are the major players in the FPS genre and why Titanfall 2 struggles to make sales from it's own merits. The consumer appears to be afraid of change or weary in investing in new IP's even when existing IP's disappoint (or get more boring) year over year. On the other hand it allows you to be more creative, instead of creating content where all other games have come before, you can add something previously unseen.

As part of a future tech tree update, we will want to let players do a lot of interesting things with the different T3s. We may eventually change the way T3s upgrade where you don’t pick their upgrade when they level up but rather they get a general bonus with their specific coolness chosen at the macro level as techs.

I'm just going to throw this out there. What about being able to customise our own loadouts? Perhaps allow the building of upgrades directly on the T3 when it is already built. The level system would allow better upgrades to be built/swapped/changed...

Right now we have two. But we would also like to have a turtle based victory path as well where they can build something that slowly spreads across the land.

This reminds me of your original idea of the Substrate only being able to build on some organic compound that grew and spread, yet abandoned as it slowed down expansion too much. This could be a growth that damaged enemy structures once it reached them, neutralise or capture Power Generators, slow down enemy unit speed. Just brain storming here.

I think the current Ascendancy Wars button should get renamed to Campaign and Ascendancy Wars call up a map of the galaxy (or at least the Orion sector) with thousands of worlds on it with you versus several AI factions.

Different worlds would give you wealth and you could use that wealth to buy more Quantum Bandwidth that would let you basically set up defenses on worlds so that they are harder to take. Some worlds would unlock skins and other special goodies that would get added to your account.

That sounds great. Campaign should just be that, a series of mission you get to play out.

Ascendancy Wars is the take over of the galaxy. It would be nice to mix this up. Have objectives to accomplish, rather than just destroy the enemy base or reach critical mass. Side story's could be played out over a period of time, supplementing the campaign lore.

I loved the idea of fighting over a battlefield since Command and Conquer introduced a world region in which you had limited choices in which battlefields you could engage in. Red Alert 2 allowed players to fight over territory online. Emperor for Dune expanded on that idea for single player.

Our community is great (the people). There just aren’t enough of them.

One thing we’re going to do in the next couple weeks is release an external tool that will make it easy to see when the queue is busy and let you chat with people from outside the game.

That’s the near-term boost we can do.

The longer-term version will require some more thought.

That's a cool idea, which must have expanded from part of the Tournament edition idea. What about integration with third party apps? Can something be done with Discord? Specifically mentioned because its the new flavour for gamers and is pretty popular platform for gamers.

That’s a $40k per month burn rate. The sales will support this. However, where we need help is in evangelism. Making sure people know about this game and how it’s evolving.

Participating on the forums and telling us what you want to see will help us prioritize.

Just your presence in the community helps. We’re in this for the long-haul (at least until 2022 anyway, then we’ll see where things stand).

That's great. Can I also suggest that you are more vocal about what concerns/bugs you have recorded yourselves and what you picked up from the community. There are some silly bugs present, even those that have persisted from launch. It would be helpful to know if you are aware of these thing or they are just not a priority for you. I'm sure you aware that even non game breaking bugs can frustrate players and turn them away. Just an example: the whole orbital panel being switched off when units you have selected start dying.

All in all, I like what I have read and will be supporting you and your team as you continue to improve Ashes for the many years to come. Now if I could just identify what I really like in an RTS, I'm sure I could be of some help in providing helpful suggestions.

Sorry for the multiple posts. But, hey. At least I didn't break the board again

The problem with ashes how I see it is after the campagin what shoulf I do next? Mp? Single player? The mp is great when you can win, I remember how I got recked before I finally understood what to do... It was not the funniest experience before I understood how to win. Skirmish? The ai is great just one problem, it's not the funniest thing to do for everyone over time. First pri is getting the new expancion out, since you have to choose what to focus on? What gives you most money and benifitt the players aswell that should be your pri 1. So what gives most money, a staying player who buys expansions or something else like short term? If you want them to play and stick to the game, they need to get something that makes them stay. A single player in a galaxy against the ai is something that might do the job and probly boost sales if pr is used... Also the reward system that can be made like skins and that stuff would be great to have, hope you guys decide to go for this, I hope the community supports that. Think someone said 95%+ only play single player so making it better in single player makes sense, glad you guys have so fahr listned to the community, the game is only getting better then

The problem with ashes how I see it is after the campagin what shoulf I do next? Mp? Single player?

To be fair though, every RTS suffers that issue. I know for me, the answer has always been mods, and/or doing ridiculous stacked matches. And so far, it looks like Stardock is doing everything they can to keep the content pipeline going, so I wouldn't panic over replay value.

All joking aside, I only got in to SoaSE late (Rebellion), but I couldn't be more happy with my decision. Unique 4X gameplay, decent mod selection, fun core game... If Ashes follows a similar path I'll be elated.

Wonderful read! I am along for the ride. I myself am more of a defender than aggressively striking out. Ive found that certain maps in most games allow my gameplay style.

Being a long time Sins of a Solar empire player, starcraft, eve online and mostly space games. Ive found that my taste has refined into more of a mix between Stellaris's loadout and Soase. Everything about ashes is good but I think what it lacks is diversity in the fleet. In eve you have hundreds of players using doctrines of different ships in different roles. In stellaris they made a ship designer that allows you to fit modules and guns onto the ship and you can build multiple types of that same ship. I feel that that is what sins lacks and that's something Ashes is lacking that I crave. It comes with the ability to choose one of two upgrades but what if I want to build an armor tanking fleet and ships that only rep shield doesnt help that fleet. Or if I want to use one weapon type over another.

I would also like to see the battlefield overhauled. The graphics in my opinion on the ground are nothing special and to new players the lines look silly, is what I gather from reading the same comments over and over.

Direct control. This was always my most missed item was putting me onto the ground in First person view. Look at GTA 1,2 and then the success of 3. Sins allows you to zoom all the way to the ship and move around so you can somewhat do it, but not that taking direct control in a battle. If this was implemented it should be easy to jump in and out of ships on the ground and still build. But the ultimate RTS would give you that ground view. Jumping into your baddest dread as two or three faction face off and all out assault each other and watch the carnage from the ground! Seeing hundreds of drones coming in and out of explosion plumes and smoke as chaos is unleashed on the battlefield.

I've played a lot of Stellaris. I have really tried to like it. They are trying to fix the mid-game. The latest DLC are fixing problems but are boring. The mods are coming and are probably the only thing that will give that product legs in the future. It's a beautiful game (so are Endless Space (that interface damn) and the latest Master of Orion) but they are not fun. F U N. They are not fun. It's like biting a chocolate Easter Bunny only to find out it's hollow. They don't have a soul.

Does Singularity have a soul? Is there a there there? I spent 48 hours playing it the week it came out. I have not played it since. I didn't find what I was looking for.

Every time I hear the original (vanilla) Sins background music my heart swells. All the hours spent in that universe condensed into the sweet nectar of love I drown my real life in.

How many of us have started playing at 6 PM after dinner, pausing only long enough to put the kids to bed, only to realize the sun is coming up and you have to get the kids off to school and yourself to work?

That's a game worth loving, supporting and playing. Because you give the precious hours of your life to it. You will NEVER get them back. The games you play had better damn well be worth playing.

My god the rising crescendo of (affectionately) Vanilla, Entrenchment, Diplomacy and now Rebellion. We may never see the likes of it again but we should expect nothing less.

I would also like to see the battlefield overhauled. The graphics in my opinion on the ground are nothing special and to new players the lines look silly

this would be nice to have improved. i also dont like having to go to strategic view to see where the next linked zone is. since the lines sometimes are not very easy to see in normal view (like they are too transparent or something)

a grand campaign or whatever its called with the various systems to conquer would be cool, those are by far my favourite types of campaigns. any campaign where each mission effects the next is great. and i would think it should be quite easy to play with both races, meaning the campaign would have even more replayability. but i can understand it might be a lot of work. COH:ardennes has it, Plannetary Annihilation has it, DOW had it, rise of nations had it, and many other games and it was always my favourite type of campaign.

for me longevity lies in MP. there is only so much u can replay in a SP game, otherwise it means tons of man hrs making new scenarios, campaigns, missions, changes etc. but i do know thats not where the greater amount of players are interested.

but like with most games i think it all comes down to the player base, the more players the more diverse the ranked matches (so no stacking or wipes by OP players vs noobs), wider variety of custom matches, new player made content etc, so i agree the best way we can help is to grow the community, which will actually help us in the long run. we need to give in order to receive. but thats probably the hardest thing to get right..

im not trying to sound like a saint or anything, but in my effort to grow the game, even if im winning, i will even surrender a match to another player if i feel like they gave a good effort, just to try to encourage players that MP isnt as rough as it seems... and i refuse to rush/run highly aggressive tactics just so i can get a quick win, and rob the opponent of any joy in playing

a grand campaign or whatever its called with the various systems to conquer would be cool, those are by far my favourite types of campaigns. any campaign where each mission effects the next is great. and i would think it should be quite easy to play with both races, meaning the campaign would have even more replayability. but i can understand it might be a lot of work. COH:ardennes has it, Plannetary Annihilation has it, DOW had it, rise of nations had it, and many other games and it was always my favourite type of campaign.

Agreed so much. Grand campaigns provide so much more gameplay than a tailored campaign. I've played through Starcraft II's campaigns twice each (Haven't got LotV yet though). I've played through Dawn of War's... Gosh, dozens at least. A grand campaign just has so many moving parts that it inherently has replay value even without fancy videos and custom mission effects.

for me longevity lies in MP. there is only so much u can replay in a SP game, otherwise it means tons of man hrs making new scenarios, campaigns, missions, changes etc. but i do know thats not where the greater amount of players are interested.

but like with most games i think it all comes down to the player base, the more players the more diverse the ranked matches (so no stacking or wipes by OP players vs noobs), wider variety of custom matches, new player made content etc, so i agree the best way we can help is to grow the community, which will actually help us in the long run. we need to give in order to receive. but thats probably the hardest thing to get right..

im not trying to sound like a saint or anything, but in my effort to grow the game, even if im winning, i will even surrender a match to another player if i feel like they gave a good effort, just to try to encourage players that MP isnt as rough as it seems... and i refuse to rush/run highly aggressive tactics just so i can get a quick win, and rob the opponent of any joy in playing

See, I'm not especially in agreement here. Longevity most certainly can be influenced by a successful Multiplayer, but is very rarely kept going by one. Dawn of War II had way more multiplayer guys than the first one ever did, yet the first one continues to be played these days. Most of that is due to mod support, but point being, multiplayer is super, super dangerous basket to put your eggs in, especially with a game that has 4% the playerbase of Dawn of War II, and less than 2% that of Starcraft II.

Personal taste, but I think they have the perfect pipeline to keep players interested in playing: Mod support, followed by more races, followed by the trickle-down kind of stuff that helps out the competitive side.

Please provide the name of it, please, because that sounds like something I'd love to pick up!

Agreed so much. Grand campaigns provide so much more gameplay than a tailored campaign. I've played through Starcraft II's campaigns twice each (Haven't got LotV yet though). I've played through Dawn of War's... Gosh, dozens at least. A grand campaign just has so many moving parts that it inherently has replay value even without fancy videos and custom mission effects.

See, I'm not especially in agreement here. Longevity most certainly can be influenced by a successful Multiplayer, but is very rarely kept going by one. Dawn of War II had way more multiplayer guys than the first one ever did, yet the first one continues to be played these days. Most of that is due to mod support, but point being, multiplayer is super, super dangerous basket to put your eggs in, especially with a game that has 4% the playerbase of Dawn of War II, and less than 2% that of Starcraft II.

Personal taste, but I think they have the perfect pipeline to keep players interested in playing: Mod support, followed by more races, followed by the trickle-down kind of stuff that helps out the competitive side.

Dawn of Andromeda.

I agree most players go for SP. And thats why i mentioned it. But would u get 1000 hours out of any campaign? How much work would have been needed to go into a game to let a player get 1000 hrs out of SP? Or what about 4000 hrs? Or 8000? Yes ive seen players with over 8000 hrs in game. Thats what i mean, i know most players play for SP, but there is only so much game time u can get out of a game, for the amount of work put in. True longevity comes from MP. Yeah mods and stuff are cool, and do definitely add to the experience and draw new players. But ultimately I think mods come from MP(how many people that make mods play them or expose them to SP only?). Same goes for SC. I know its a lazy example but look at DOTA for warcraft

Don't get me wrong, I do still think the most effort should be put into SP (although it has the smallest return per man hour per player, it effects the most players)

I also still play the DoW 2 campaigns. And just last week i was playing the DoW Soulstorm campaign. So i know how it goes I also never bought LotV, as cool as it looks it just took too long for its release.

I agree they currently have a great pipeline, we just need to get more clients into the pipe

I agree most players go for SP. And thats why i mentioned it. But would u get 1000 hours out of any campaign? How much work would have been needed to go into a game to let a player get 1000 hrs out of SP? Or what about 4000 hrs? Or 8000? Yes ive seen players with over 8000 hrs in game. Thats what i mean, i know most players play for SP, but there is only so much game time u can get out of a game, for the amount of work put in. True longevity comes from MP. Yeah mods and stuff are cool, and do definitely add to the experience and draw new players. But ultimately I think mods come from MP(how many people that make mods play them or expose them to SP only?). Same goes for SC. I know its a lazy example but look at DOTA for warcraft

Don't get me wrong, I do still think the most effort should be put into SP (although it has the smallest return per man hour per player, it effects the most players)

I also still play the DoW 2 campaigns. And just last week i was playing the DoW Soulstorm campaign. So i know how it goes I also never bought LotV, as cool as it looks it just took too long for its release.

I agree they currently have a great pipeline, we just need to get more clients into the pipe

Neat, I missed that. Thanks!

I would argue singleplayer sees more mods than multiplayer (Look at the Elder Scrolls series, or Fallout), but that's a fair opinion.

Agree so much on LotV. The could've had my money at full price. Now I'll only pick it up if I see it drop to $5, I've kinda moved on from SCII.

Yes, I really, really hope more people get in to Ashes of the Singularity. I think part of the reason they don't is ironically because of how hyped up its requirements were. Everyone was so stoked that this game was too much for consoles to handle, so I wonder how many people with mid-range hardware stayed away just out of caution.